I haven't seen the photos but apparently adusterjack has and he had said it isn't clearly discensble the sunroof and wire wheels are not present. A buyer can depend on a clearly stated factual representation of the merchandise.
Now think about this;
Op argues the errors are basically copy and paste errors. What was he copying and pasting from where he would have accidentally included such material representations? It sounds like he intentionally included the equipment and is now using the weak argument to defend it.
Regardless of error or intent, he can be held responsible for the incorrect representation of the car.
The repair issues are irrelevent other than the buyer is using the misrepresentation as leverage to get a discount. Oo can either negotiate or rescind, including shipping costs payable to the buyer.
I've been lurking, and this has me wondering as well.
He did not just cut and paste. He edited and reedited.
Additionally, although he presents himself as something other than an auto dealer, he has opined about how he has missed "a slew of work and headache free sales" dealing with this one... How many cars does OP have up for sale?! Because it's sounding like, if the headache free sales were cars, that it's actually a business... Or serious hobby. Which makes his misrepresentation of the car even less acceptable.
Look, if I were a collector, and saw that someone in the know said "all the super-rare and expensive options" and instead got one lacking those, I'd be hopping mad. It's not as advertised. I would feel like there had been a bait and switch.